The whole pitch thing is a debacle on many levels. The 2 year unattended drainage problem, previous lack of maintainence, communication level pre and post match, lack of referee inspection, lack of operation manager oversite, and absence of any coherent plan with all those supporters travelling miles put out for time and expense is not to be ignored. The thread goes through that big time. I do not want to underestimate the disruption and cost that people went through.
I do agree with NLA that everyone loves a good moan, especially when with good reason (as Charlton supporters, we get plenty of reason for that). NLA can answer for themselves but I didn't read that they thought that the pitch doesn't need sorting but for people to get a grip in typical NLA style.
For myself it meant missing the football, not seeing my brother who could not make it anyway and getting on with some household sorting out jobs as encouraged by the Mrs. Others, I understand had more disruption and I am sorry for that. I hope the club accounts for that. There was disruption but no fatalities. I agree with NLA on the putting things into perspective level.
The whole thing needs a proper sort though after with the aim of improving processes and procedures. Now is the time for the club and supporters to pull together. The focus should be now on how to resolve the problem with the pitch. I will be pissed off if the club doesn't sort that sharpish.
I don't really understand why people are blaming comms more than ground staff. The ground staff said the pitch was playable and there was no reason to have an early inspection. Therefore there was nothing for comms to say unless they were going to argue that the ground staff were wrong. Then the ref arrives and says he is going to do a pitch inspection which the comms team tweeted. There is the possibility that they could have raised this earlier but only by an hour or two so it wouldn't have had an effect on the longer journeys. Then they tweet the game is abandoned. After this they have to find the facts, speak to management and work together to put a statement out. Admittedly they did not do this very well and I understand they didn't answer the phone to journos last night. There was indeed a poor reaction, but the reason people are pissed off is because the game was called of late which is the ground staff's fault and not comms fault.
God I hate agreeing with Airman but this is not a blame comms, blame ground staff, blame anyone ... this is the responsibility of the top management of Charlton. If the comms team were not answering the phone they will have been told not to answer the phone, the poor communication particularly the post announcement release would have been vetted and authorised by the club. Someone should have responded to the 606 phone call, not the comms team. Steve Bradshaw is the current head of the club, the buck stops with him.
At a time when football pitch care and maintenance technology is at an all time high and virtually a science it's only Charlton Athletic that could with such panache roll back the years to 1970 and provide a playing surface which is now officially the worst and castigated in the entire football league and beyond. It has cost supporters thousands of pounds. Will cost the club god only knows how much to remedy and in fines and perhaps worst of all has made us quite rightly a laughing stock. The winter and spring are yet to come with no possibility of an adequate quick fix. The repercussions could be enormous.
How this cannot be viewed as a cluster wottsit of the highest magnitude is astonishing.
Well said, SHG.
This is why I posted last night that I'd expect a meeting to have been convened as soon after 1.30 yesterday to formulate an urgent "game plan" to address this problem.
This could be the issue that defines the remainder of our season - Players unsure about signing new contracts ( when that is finally addressed) will be less sure of the division they could be plying their trade in next season with the build up of games /state of the pitch having an effect on home results.
Leave apportioning blame to one side temporarily and prioritise .
I'm also wondering if the collapsed drain is part of a wider problem in the area... for a couple of years or more, we've noticed a frequent smell of sewage as we walk along Woolwich Road. There will certainly be a smell of sewage in the club on Monday morning.
That's low tide on The Thames - the mudbanks can really chuck up sometimes - particularly in the summer.
Always used to stink of burnt sugar....a few years ago mind.
Compensation before we say yes to the above we first need to know how many people we are talking about. Thats not only the away fans but our own who have travelled long distances. Are we talking 300--500--800 ? then how much are we going to give each fan , £10 -------so thats anything between £3000----to£8000.
As for the club doing something----------like they did for Lee Rigby ? the fans did it for Lee and it will be the fans who (if we do) do it again.
I'm also wondering if the collapsed drain is part of a wider problem in the area... for a couple of years or more, we've noticed a frequent smell of sewage as we walk along Woolwich Road. There will certainly be a smell of sewage in the club on Monday morning.
That's low tide on The Thames - the mudbanks can really chuck up sometimes - particularly in the summer.
Always used to stink of burnt sugar....a few years ago mind.
As COO, Steve Bradshaw could decide on the following:
1. The Valley pitch is at high risk from weather events for the rest of the season. 2. therefore, for every home game, 24 hours beforehand, the pitch will be inspected with the help of a locally based ref. 3. If the assessment is a 50% or more chance of postponement, fans will be informed 4. A further inspection will take place at 09.00 next day (08.00 if the visiting fans have a journey of more than 4 hours).again,the fans will be informed 5. If the match ref has not carried out the 09.00 inspection, and the risk is still assessed at more than 50%, he will be asked to inspect and decide asap. His decision will be communicated by Twitter immediately
Steve Bradshaw is The Chief Operations Officer. He is responsible for the stadium.
It is evident that the pitch has major problems due to collapsed drainage & capped/sealed drains (allegedly).
Therefore any water will not drain away properly.
Any COO worthy of his position, would surely, have personally inspected the pitch, together with the ground staff on a regular basis this week.
Following these inspections, then there should have been regular updates, to say that there was doubt over the Barnsley game proceeding.
There should have been a local referee called in yesterday, to inspect and to announce his view.
If the referee decided that a further inspection would be required on Saturday, then this should have been communicated & the inspection should have taken place at 9am this morning.
Unless, someone can explain why the above is factually incorrect or was not possible, then I believe Mr Bradshaw is at fault for this debacle.
If I'm wrong, I apologise, but this is the way I see it & it doesn't come as a great surprise.
Thing is pa you get a local ref to do the 9am inspection he says playable
The match ref arrives at 12 and disagrees game off announcement by 1
Same situation
Al being 5 mins into my journey is why its an inconvience had I been on way to game earlier I wouldve been in the pub not really an inconvience then as I would have had a booze
Being off the beer was the main reason I didn't want to go and it meant I could do some home stuff
Until I got a text saying someone else was going I didn't fancy it I got the text and thought yep I'd go
That's why a home postponement is an inconvience unless your travelling miles
Steve Bradshaw is The Chief Operations Officer. He is responsible for the stadium.
It is evident that the pitch has major problems due to collapsed drainage & capped/sealed drains (allegedly).
Therefore any water will not drain away properly.
Any COO worthy of his position, would surely, have personally inspected the pitch, together with the ground staff on a regular basis this week.
Following these inspections, then there should have been regular updates, to say that there was doubt over the Barnsley game proceeding.
There should have been a local referee called in yesterday, to inspect and to announce his view.
If the referee decided that a further inspection would be required on Saturday, then this should have been communicated & the inspection should have taken place at 9am this morning.
Unless, someone can explain why the above is factually incorrect or was not possible, then I believe Mr Bradshaw is at fault for this debacle.
If I'm wrong, I apologise, but this is the way I see it & it doesn't come as a great surprise.
Bradshaw imo is a compete buck passing numpty.
Be interesting to know what time he and others arrived at The Valley on Saturday. The signing-in book would show that.
Steve Bradshaw is The Chief Operations Officer. He is responsible for the stadium.
It is evident that the pitch has major problems due to collapsed drainage & capped/sealed drains (allegedly).
Therefore any water will not drain away properly.
Any COO worthy of his position, would surely, have personally inspected the pitch, together with the ground staff on a regular basis this week.
Following these inspections, then there should have been regular updates, to say that there was doubt over the Barnsley game proceeding.
There should have been a local referee called in yesterday, to inspect and to announce his view.
If the referee decided that a further inspection would be required on Saturday, then this should have been communicated & the inspection should have taken place at 9am this morning.
Unless, someone can explain why the above is factually incorrect or was not possible, then I believe Mr Bradshaw is at fault for this debacle.
If I'm wrong, I apologise, but this is the way I see it & it doesn't come as a great surprise.
Bradshaw imo is a compete buck passing numpty.
Be interesting to know what time he and others arrived at The Valley on Saturday. The signing-in book would show that.
Only thing he should be signing is the signing on book at the job centre
Steve Bradshaw is The Chief Operations Officer. He is responsible for the stadium.
It is evident that the pitch has major problems due to collapsed drainage & capped/sealed drains (allegedly).
Therefore any water will not drain away properly.
Any COO worthy of his position, would surely, have personally inspected the pitch, together with the ground staff on a regular basis this week.
Following these inspections, then there should have been regular updates, to say that there was doubt over the Barnsley game proceeding.
There should have been a local referee called in yesterday, to inspect and to announce his view.
If the referee decided that a further inspection would be required on Saturday, then this should have been communicated & the inspection should have taken place at 9am this morning.
Unless, someone can explain why the above is factually incorrect or was not possible, then I believe Mr Bradshaw is at fault for this debacle.
If I'm wrong, I apologise, but this is the way I see it & it doesn't come as a great surprise.
Bradshaw imo is a compete buck passing numpty.
Be interesting to know what time he and others arrived at The Valley on Saturday. The signing-in book would show that.
Steve Bradshaw is The Chief Operations Officer. He is responsible for the stadium.
It is evident that the pitch has major problems due to collapsed drainage & capped/sealed drains (allegedly).
Therefore any water will not drain away properly.
Any COO worthy of his position, would surely, have personally inspected the pitch, together with the ground staff on a regular basis this week.
Following these inspections, then there should have been regular updates, to say that there was doubt over the Barnsley game proceeding.
There should have been a local referee called in yesterday, to inspect and to announce his view.
If the referee decided that a further inspection would be required on Saturday, then this should have been communicated & the inspection should have taken place at 9am this morning.
Unless, someone can explain why the above is factually incorrect or was not possible, then I believe Mr Bradshaw is at fault for this debacle.
If I'm wrong, I apologise, but this is the way I see it & it doesn't come as a great surprise.
Bradshaw imo is a compete buck passing numpty.
Be interesting to know what time he and others arrived at The Valley on Saturday. The signing-in book would show that.
Or was he just in the bar :-)
Probably stuck waiting in line for pint. No wonder he didn't get down in time to check the pitch. ;-).
Not much to add to all the above - except to note that all of the long-standing and chronic problems facing the club were never going to be resolved immediately following the takeover. Given that we know Paddy and Nathan have produced magnificent pitches in the past, we have to acknowledge that the root of the current problems with the pitch is severe under-investment. There is a defective drainage system, relatively poor seed having been used (so I believe) and a lack of covers, heating and artificial lighting. Some of that can be and is being addressed immediately but the big work can only be done in the close season - and they need to give the ground staff the whole time to get it right, none of those silly matches at the end of the season to raise a few quid.
Meanwhile, we are going to be on a knife edge right through to April, and it's going to be a slog. No point in digging out Paddy and his team, and that would be unfair anyway.
The senior management and the communications team did a poor job yesterday, and that really needs to be addressed. But for the pitch, the board should listen to Paddy, give him whatever he asks for and then keep their fingers crossed, like the rest of us.
As COO, Steve Bradshaw could decide on the following:
1. The Valley pitch is at high risk from weather events for the rest of the season. 2. therefore, for every home game, 24 hours beforehand, the pitch will be inspected with the help of a locally based ref. 3. If the assessment is a 50% or more chance of postponement, fans will be informed 4. A further inspection will take place at 09.00 next day (08.00 if the visiting fans have a journey of more than 4 hours).again,the fans will be informed 5. If the match ref has not carried out the 09.00 inspection, and the risk is still assessed at more than 50%, he will be asked to inspect and decide asap. His decision will be communicated by Twitter immediately
OK, people, please punch holes in that.
I think that’s a good comms/’customer care’ plan from now on – and communicating that it will happen will also go some way to alleviating the bad feeling created yesterday.
However, of course, the club needs to have a plan to deal with the underlying problem and to also communicate that as soon as possible.
As I’ve posted before:
“If they definitely know that the drains have collapsed (as has been stated) then presumably it’s been confirmed by using a cctv ‘drain cam’? In which case it would almost certainly have been done by a professional drain company who I would hope have also advised whether the broken pipes can be remotely relined (involving ‘blowing’ a new resin impregnated lining into the pipe which then sets hard).
However, if the collapse is due to movement (sudsidence?) of the enlarged North Stand (as I think has been suggested) then it’s possible that this might even need some sort of underpinning to effect a proper solution?”
If the collapsed drains can’t be remotely relined and/or dealing with the drains requires dealing with the cause of the collapse – possible ‘movement’ of the North Stand - then because the on/off rain could continue for the rest of the winter the club needs to face that and have a plan to deal with it –even possibly including playing games elsewhere for a short period if necessary – and then communicate that to the FA, fans and the media.
That is a point. IF the pitch was the same as the previous two games, I can't see how it was dangerous or unplayable. It wasn't the greatest true, but certainly playable. Now we have to take the groundstaff's word that the pitch was the same, but the ref could have been part of the problem here! Might have been worth him starting the game and calling it off if it proved to be unplayable!
From the pics I have seen of the pitch, it looked playable. I don't think anybody can say that either the Brighton and Wednesday games were a farce - the ball stuck a bit in places and there was no bounce in the north stand goal area on boxing day, but there was never a suggestion of danger or that football couldn't be played on it.
Comments
I do agree with NLA that everyone loves a good moan, especially when with good reason (as Charlton supporters, we get plenty of reason for that). NLA can answer for themselves but I didn't read that they thought that the pitch doesn't need sorting but for people to get a grip in typical NLA style.
For myself it meant missing the football, not seeing my brother who could not make it anyway and getting on with some household sorting out jobs as encouraged by the Mrs. Others, I understand had more disruption and I am sorry for that. I hope the club accounts for that. There was disruption but no fatalities. I agree with NLA on the putting things into perspective level.
The whole thing needs a proper sort though after with the aim of improving processes and procedures. Now is the time for the club and supporters to pull together. The focus should be now on how to resolve the problem with the pitch. I will be pissed off if the club doesn't sort that sharpish.
Yep I get that and agree but unless people have the balls to call the ground staff liars and chris powell an incompetnt mgr who is also responsible
Because I would have been checking the pitch just so I could nick and advantage
We have to accept that the ref made a call that 2 prior refs hadn't
The offical line from the club is that the pitch was the same as brighton and sheff weds
So who is to blame those two refs for playing games that got us 4 points or this one for calling it off
I wasn't going but got a text from someone who was and I thought bollox I will go
Got in car to leave and got text saying game off so I went back in home
It is the outrage that gets me what else couldve been done if you don't want to believe anything other than what the club says
This is why I posted last night that I'd expect a meeting to have been convened as soon after 1.30 yesterday to formulate an urgent "game plan" to address this problem.
This could be the issue that defines the remainder of our season - Players unsure about signing new contracts ( when that is finally addressed) will be less sure of the division they could be plying their trade in next season with the build up of games /state of the pitch having an effect on home results.
Leave apportioning blame to one side temporarily and prioritise .
End of.
I wasn't going but got a text from someone who was and I thought bollox I will go
Got in car to leave and got text saying game off so I went back in home
Thought not!
before we say yes to the above we first need to know how many people we are talking about. Thats not only the away fans but our own who have travelled long distances. Are we talking 300--500--800 ? then how much are we going to give each fan , £10 -------so thats anything between £3000----to£8000.
As for the club doing something----------like they did for Lee Rigby ? the fans did it for Lee and it will be the fans who (if we do) do it again.
As COO, Steve Bradshaw could decide on the following:
1. The Valley pitch is at high risk from weather events for the rest of the season.
2. therefore, for every home game, 24 hours beforehand, the pitch will be inspected with the help of a locally based ref.
3. If the assessment is a 50% or more chance of postponement, fans will be informed
4. A further inspection will take place at 09.00 next day (08.00 if the visiting fans have a journey of more than 4 hours).again,the fans will be informed
5. If the match ref has not carried out the 09.00 inspection, and the risk is still assessed at more than 50%, he will be asked to inspect and decide asap. His decision will be communicated by Twitter immediately
OK, people, please punch holes in that.
Surely that has to be a positive ?
Anyway if DRF can't punch a hole in something I've written, that's a good start :-)
The match ref arrives at 12 and disagrees game off announcement by 1
Same situation
Al being 5 mins into my journey is why its an inconvience had I been on way to game earlier I wouldve been in the pub not really an inconvience then as I would have had a booze
Being off the beer was the main reason I didn't want to go and it meant I could do some home stuff
Until I got a text saying someone else was going I didn't fancy it I got the text and thought yep I'd go
That's why a home postponement is an inconvience unless your travelling miles
Given where we are with this pitch and the drainage, Prague's 5 point plan seems sensible for the foreseeable future.
Meanwhile, we are going to be on a knife edge right through to April, and it's going to be a slog. No point in digging out Paddy and his team, and that would be unfair anyway.
The senior management and the communications team did a poor job yesterday, and that really needs to be addressed. But for the pitch, the board should listen to Paddy, give him whatever he asks for and then keep their fingers crossed, like the rest of us.
but in this case the pitch was in the same condition as the previous two home games
Therefore the ref in this occasion called it as unplayable
If one of the other games were called off I am sure the clubs response wouldve been different
However, of course, the club needs to have a plan to deal with the underlying problem and to also communicate that as soon as possible.
As I’ve posted before:
“If they definitely know that the drains have collapsed (as has been stated) then presumably it’s been confirmed by using a cctv ‘drain cam’? In which case it would almost certainly have been done by a professional drain company who I would hope have also advised whether the broken pipes can be remotely relined (involving ‘blowing’ a new resin impregnated lining into the pipe which then sets hard).
However, if the collapse is due to movement (sudsidence?) of the enlarged North Stand (as I think has been suggested) then it’s possible that this might even need some sort of underpinning to effect a proper solution?”
If the collapsed drains can’t be remotely relined and/or dealing with the drains requires dealing with the cause of the collapse – possible ‘movement’ of the North Stand - then because the on/off rain could continue for the rest of the winter the club needs to face that and have a plan to deal with it –even possibly including playing games elsewhere for a short period if necessary – and then communicate that to the FA, fans and the media.